Warning to RainbowRunner G owners!

[Richard Postgate]

I just bought an OEM G400/32M (all that is available here at the moment), and to my absolute disgust and dismay, it does not have one of the connectors necessary to connect the Rainbow Runner G capture card to it! The spot is there on the card, but there is no connector soldered to it. Considering I have been using my RR-G with an OEM G200 just fine, I am seriously pissed off at this. I imagine it must have been a buttheaded marketing decision, considering the stupid connector must cost 10 cents. Right now I am trying to decide between returning the G400 and selling the RR-G (and never again buying Matrox, probably), or soldering on a connector myself (I could take one off the G200 I suppose).
I hearty F**K YOU to Matrox for this one, all over a 10-cent connector.

[rickT]

Did you get a Dualhead G400? I bought an OEM G400 DH 32MB and it has all the connectors on it.

[Kruzin]

It's obvious from you whole 1 post, that you have not bothered reading these forums, the DeskTopVideo forums, or the MURC news. We've all known for some time that the OEM G400s would not work with RR-G. Matrox even made a press release some time ago stating this fact. It's nobody's fault but your own that you did no research into the product you bought.

Back in June, this (and several similar news bits) where posted, and there are several threads in the DTV forum covering this topic as well:
Please note that the OEM single head G400s DO NOT support the Rainbow Runner-G. OEM boards contain only a driver CD.

In addition, if you had done your homework, you would have seen this news as well:
Although Matrox have announced that the Rainbow Runner-Gs are compatible with the Millennium G400 DualHead boards you will not actually be able to have this setup working until Matrox release G400 compatible Video Tools. There is no current ETA from Matrox on these.
So even if you had gotten a compatible card, there are still no compatible drivers/tools yet.

Sounds like the only one to be mad at is yourself, for making an uninformed purchase. Next time, read up on what you are planning to buy at: http://www.murc.ws/news.html

[This message has been edited by Kruzin (edited 07-10-99).]

[Shlooky]

Richard I think your a blind F***ING idiot..!!!!!

Didn't you read the press release from Matrox..?
It said that "THE OEM single head G400 card WILL NOT SUPPORT THE RR-G"

So return the card and buy a Dual head version!!!!!

Chaosers,
Shlooky

[GinoCyber]

Did somebody come out of hibernation?

Ciao

[Richard Postgate]

Well, fine, so I'm blind. In all the stuff I read, I never saw this mention that the board wouldn't work with the RR-G. But I still think it's an amazingly stupid marketing decision, just to save 10 cents per bloody board. The lowest-end OEM G200 card I could find (and bought) has the stupid connector on it (cost: $100 CDN). The $230CDN G400 doesn't have it (and it is obviously the same board - the spot for the connector is there). Are margins really that low? I doubt it. And I'll bet if I solder the stupid connector on it will work just fine (when they release the software I suppose - I also didn't realise that the current drivers don't support the RR-G).

[mragsdale]

Mr. Prostate,
I am absolutely sure, that the reason they leave 'em off is not for the simple reason of saving a few pennies. I believe it has more to do with, they want the single head value oem cards that go into those cheaper, OEM (oh yeah, that's why they call them OEM) systems that most people don't bother doing upgrades on. It is a wise marketing decision if you ask me. They want there to be distinguishible differences between the lower-end cards (the ones that HP, Compaq, and Packard Bell, etc. use.) and the better, upper end cards (the one's I have my eye on, and the one's YOU should have had your eye on). Intel does the same thing. Remember the original celeron. How about the ZX chipset, the 810 chipset. It would have cost them nil to include all of the beloved features of the BX chipset, but they wanted them to be distinguished between value and top o' the line.
Just my nickel and a half.

Matt

------------------
Yes, I am serious and don't call me Shirley

[TheMorg]

Richard, just take a look at page 2 of the "Features" page off the G400 web site. Here's the URL if you're feeling a bit lazy:

<a href="http://www.matrox.com/mga/g400/products/homepg2.htm">http://www.matrox.com/mga/g400/products/homepg2.htm</a>

You will notice a section called "Multimedia upgrades", which says:

<a href="http://www.matrox.com/mga/g400/applications/mult/home.htm">Click here</a> for details regarding upgrades such as hardware M-JPEG video editing, TV tuning, and digital Flat Panel output.

See, I've included the URL just in case it's a bit more handy.

Personally, I have a lot of sympathy for those kept in the dark by Big M, as they seem reluctant to release information until after it's had weeks to leak out through several channels.

But in this case - with all the threads here, the Press Releases, and the G400 web site "Features" information - it looks like the blame lies elsewhere.

Sorry